Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Hello Condrad
I would like to point out that I am one...count them...one, of a list of people who both do and teach this stuff.
1. This is not about me.
2. We have not rediscovered anything. It is as old as the hills
3. What we state is that it is all but gone from aikido and other arts, and those that have some or most of it, are not doing a good job of teaching it.

Those are some very different points than what you portray.

One last critical set of questions that always...and I mean always fails to be mentioned in these counter arguments.
4. Why is it that all who feel it...want to train it?
This includes an incredible list of Shihan, Menkyo and Senior teachers?
Why Conrad?
5. Why has Four top world famous Japanese shihans sign off and approved of it after seeing what it is doing to their student/shihan teachers
Why?
6. Why has every....single.... one....of you failed against it and that is not acknowledged?
7. And why is that fact...never brought up? It's been stated often enough. I'm just curious.
Thoughts?

Cheers
Dan

You don't have to reply to me but as I am usually put as someone who counter argues about I/P then those 'critical questions befuddle me as well as the first three points, well especially 2 and 3.

If you (3) 'plural' state it is all but gone from Aikido and other arts then it appears to me you must have rediscovered it in order to put it back in. Thus 2 don't make sense. On reintroducing it it would then allow others to rediscover it also. Mmmmm. maybe it's a language thing.

4) All??? I doubt it.

5) The answers quite obvious, they found it useful for them. I'd like to ask them myself though for I would ask for their particular reasons and how it fits into Aikido for them and where it doesn't.

6) Not true. In fact impossible.

7) Because it's not a fact and could never be.

There you are, I've now brought it up.

Note that even what I say there doesn't make me against I/P. I just disagree with certain over exaggerated statements.

But couldn't the claim be true and also be a big "so what"? People say all kinds of things; not every statement is of deep significance. Unless you're some kind of fanatic, surely you don't think everything O-Sensei ever said was intended as some "here's the eternal truth" statement. And, if you accept that (and I know that many don't), surely the guy was allowed a tossoff remark now and again that just didn't mean that much. Maybe, if we really want to know the truth of history, we need to consider the context of historical figures' statements before assigning importance to them.

But part of the base argument is not just what he said, but where and when he said it. The translations of his only written training manual. Hardly likely to an offhand remark, surely? The doka. Suggest to a poet that any line--or word--in their poem is just tossed off, doesn't mean that much. Then duck. His students come to him and ask, "Why can't we do what we do?" A challenge within the Japanese teacher/student relationship. In that culture, this is the moment when the teacher is challenged to crystallize their teaching. And he says, "You don't understand in-yo ho."

No, these sayings were the moments when O-Sensei was trying to teach. They weren't offhand remarks.

You say, "There is no secret agenda - even if there were, what would it be?"

That is an eye opening statement. So many discussions begin with a wide variety of subjects. And from that base, it feels like a large amount of them end up about IS/IT.

When I began meditating with the TNH crowd, it appeared that many sangha leaders and dharma teachers were learning Tai Chi as taught by one specific man. His teaching happened in seminar so all of a sudden sanghas were doing Tai Chi like a dance. I observed myself becoming judgmental. Then I became grateful. Most of these folks had been divorced from their bodies by a religious culture that was deeply influenced by Puritan and manichean dualism. They were reconnecting at a pace that made their practice valuable.

John Clodig, my Yanagi teacher had me accompany him for several years teaching "Key Moves" to police, fire, water works, university science departments, zoo keepers and hotel staff in order to reduce repetitive stress injuries by becoming more efficient in handling non-human objects. We used a curriculum of internal principles and applied them to CAL OSHA projects. What we did was a great help to others.

These are agendas that use the art outside of "fighting". I experience many of these back-and-forth bickering to really be about a limited agenda - that of aikido as martial prowess; something several folks seem to be reacting to because they have different agendas or different levels within which they hope to reach.

Just an observation about agenda.

Regards,

Chris

Interesting point Chris.
It would in fact be a good exercise for people to inspect what their agenda is rather than say they don't have one. Maybe some have too much significance on the word.

I also note you mention shamanic practices. Now that's getting more spiritual I must say. It could also equate quite well with Ueshiba's type of Shinto.

In fact my partner in crime Aikido wise, who has trained with me for over thirty years is a qualified shamanic osteopath. All fascinating stuff. We ended up teaching those people too for a year.

Another interesting point you make about the spiritual folk who then started practicing tai chi. I find this type of situation often to be true where spiritual are quite divorced from the 'body' so to speak or to be more blatant from the reality of what they have learned.

I find it in those who do reiki or even forms of ki atsu, yoga, meditations of different kinds, even tai chi etc. Not all, but many. I tend to break up religions and spiritual practices now into two camps. Let's say religious philosophy and rites and rituals as one camp and religious practice as the other. Same for spiritual pursuits.

...Conclusion: Anyone who hasn't travelled to the south pole, met the leprechaun and seen the most beautiful thing in the world can have no insight or knowledge into beauty and cannot make any evidence-based judgements or hold any rational opinions on the subject. I will hereafter refer to this conclusion as "You have to go to the south pole and meet the leprechaun" (YHTGTTSPAMTL for short)

I'm quite a fan of YHTGTTSPAMTL, almost as much as the Invisible Pink Unicorn which made a big appearance on the religion listservs a while back.

But extend your example. So agreed, YHTGTTSPAMTL is stupid, but some pigheaded martial arts heavyweight (you know who you are) is stubborn enough to actually go to the south pole, and he comes back and says, oh my god, there actually is a leprechaun and YHTGTTSPAMTL!

And some people who know him go and come back shaking their heads saying, YHTGTTSPAMTL.

And some very high-up guys say, "This is ridiculous. We'll put an end to it." And they come back and don't say anything until the third or fourth beer, at which they can be heard to mumble, "yhtgttspamtl."

The fallacy of calling it a circular argument is that you are assuming you're operating in the closed universe of logical reasoning. You're not. You're operating in the open universe of empirical experience. In that world, there's only a limited amount of denying experience which is consistent with sanity.

But part of the base argument is not just what he said, but where and when he said it. The translations of his only written training manual. Hardly likely to an offhand remark, surely? The doka. Suggest to a poet that any line--or word--in their poem is just tossed off, doesn't mean that much. Then duck. His students come to him and ask, "Why can't we do what we do?" A challenge within the Japanese teacher/student relationship. In that culture, this is the moment when the teacher is challenged to crystallize their teaching. And he says, "You don't understand in-yo ho."

No, these sayings were the moments when O-Sensei was trying to teach. They weren't offhand remarks.

This whole thing so reminds me of the first and second century of Christian formation. The original followers of "The Way" did not have a creed of belief at first. A rich variety of theological views thrived (Gospel of Thomas, Epistle of Barnabas). Once a big geographical expansion occurs (After Pentechost) and the original apostles begin dying out, apostolic succession becomes very important (1st Clement; The Gospel of Mary Magdelene) and then those who take charge create creeds, not so much to proscribe outsiders, rather, to fence out fellow Christians who's views were different (Tertullian, Nicea, Chalcedon)

Graham, you've made a bunch of points recently which I agree with--particularly in the post about judgement--so I thought I'd celebrate by arguing with you.

Quote:

Graham Christian wrote:

We could also go back to doing various I/P things and thinking you got it and yet not having a clue about the spiritual.

Absolutely. The IS/IP skills have nothing directly to do with the spiritual aspects of Aikido. (Except, perhaps, that "HULK SMASH!" is not good budo.)

Quote:

Graham Christian wrote:

Two different things which combine. Specialists in I/P do not necessarily have the in depth knowledge or ability of spiritual aspects.

Yes indeedy.

Quote:

Graham Christian wrote:

If spiritual equals ineffective then it merely shows me the person with such belief has no reality on the real spiritual.

Speaking on behalf of the entire IS/IP community, I declare no one would say that spiritual equals ineffective. Mostly because we'd be too busy arguing your terms, but never mind.

Quote:

Graham Christian wrote:

The real spiritual does not put down I/P either but knows the difference. In fact contrary to some's belief it can be that I/p can be found to be not very effective by some who know the spiritual aspects well.

Oh crud, you were doing so well. This is where I think your argument runs off the rails. If you want to declare your aikido has leads to better spiritual growth than pursuing IS skills, that would be one thing. If you want to say it's more "effective"--I'm assuming martially effective, because that's the only interpretation which makes sense--then you're making a very serious claim which others are fully justified in challenging. And which you can only support by showing it in person.

On the other hand, I don't disagree with you on the subject of the spiritual dimension of O-Sensei's Aikido. I think it's clear that was important to him and an important part of his message--and an important part of what attracts people to Aikido. When he called in an "Art of Peace"--in post-war Japan--I think it was a clear and heartfelt ambition.

What I don't agree with is the idea that being focused on peace means that we all make nice. The Art of Peace is the art of the sword--as when Jesus said, "I come not to bring peace, but a sword." It's the sword that cuts through the lies and delusions, through the layers of appeasement, through the hypocrisy and politics and make-nice. It cuts through to the center, to the knot that keeps everyone bound--and it doesn't stop to untie it, but simply cuts it apart. That clarity of vision and singleness of action is, IMHO, the true budo. And it's what, at best, I think we should be trying to practice on the mat.

Quote:

Graham Christian wrote:

It's all good.

It is not. What does that even mean, anyway? The current situation in Syria is good? Global warming is good? Circular arguments on AikiWeb are good? It's feel-good noise.

This whole thing so reminds me of the first and second century of Christian formation. The original followers of "The Way" did not have a creed of belief at first. A rich variety of theological views thrived (Gospel of Thomas, Epistle of Barnabas). Once a big geographical expansion occurs (After Pentechost) and the original apostles begin dying out, apostolic succession becomes very important (1st Clement; The Gospel of Mary Magdelene) and then those who take charge create creeds, not so much to proscribe outsiders, rather, to fence out fellow Christians who's views were different (Tertullian, Nicea, Chalcedon)

Oh, Chris, come on. We're talking about what the man himself said about his own art. There's no comparison with random documents written by unknowns over a century after Jesus' death.

Dismissing sounds good. Perhaps there is also a desire to "protect" young and some not-so-young students whom you believe are being instructed in an heretical or heterodox manner.

Could this be the agenda?

Could it be one you and others have appropriated without allowing the agency of the other folks to ask you for such "protection"? Could this be the core source of all the heated discussion?

Just some thoughts.

Namaste,

Chris

Could be close.
As I said everyone has agendas. Agendas are not a bad thing of themselves. Been on this forum a couple of years now Chris and watched the 'agenda' scenes and scenarios. There's one in particular I like.

My view on Ueshiba and how he taught is from the view that he was spiritual and it showed in his teaching. At the hombu dojo in the early days and still up to now every teacher was allowed to teach his own particular style of what Ueshiba taught them. They even then went out and formed their own set ups of their particular brand. Ueshiba seemed to actively encourage this. Very spiritual and very organic.

Meanwhile those who wanted to teach still in the official organization be it at home or abroad came under the Aikikai or affiliations. Even now the attitude of Doshu is one of let it develop. In other words the teachers across the world in the Aikikai have quite a bit of freedom as to how they teach. Thus allowed to a great extent to develop their own way, to make it theirs.

Now here's the funny thing. Those who are always griping about the hombu and complaining about it and even accusing sometimes of hidden agendas remind me only of politics where an extreme party has the freedom of speech only to then get in power and ban freedom of speech. I often wonder 'why bite the hand that feeds you?' Thus I can only assume agendas.

I t also reminds me of a crowd of guys in ladbroke grove coming down to a pub angry about another crowd who had made the pub their kind of base or local. They were angry because they considered these others less entitled as they were not originally from that area. It was war time.

I couldn't help laughing especially as I knew both sets of people. Laughing at the stupidity. I took a couple of the leaders aside and listened to their argument then pointed out a simple truth. Your area, many pubs. You don't like this one or the peolple in it then go to one of the many others. What's the problem?

It was amazing, it was like they had never considered it or looked at it that way. Harmony restored.

Agendas, even hidden from self, cause griping and complaining. Don't like somewhere, then leave, what's the problem? Otherwise you are merely the enemy within.

Interesting point Chris.
It would in fact be a good exercise for people to inspect what their agenda is rather than say they don't have one. Maybe some have too much significance on the word.

I also note you mention shamanic practices. Now that's getting more spiritual I must say. It could also equate quite well with Ueshiba's type of Shinto.

In fact my partner in crime Aikido wise, who has trained with me for over thirty years is a qualified shamanic osteopath. All fascinating stuff. We ended up teaching those people too for a year.

Another interesting point you make about the spiritual folk who then started practicing tai chi. I find this type of situation often to be true where spiritual are quite divorced from the 'body' so to speak or to be more blatant from the reality of what they have learned.

I find it in those who do reiki or even forms of ki atsu, yoga, meditations of different kinds, even tai chi etc. Not all, but many. I tend to break up religions and spiritual practices now into two camps. Let's say religious philosophy and rites and rituals as one camp and religious practice as the other. Same for spiritual pursuits.

Peace.G.

It has been my experience to note that most religions are male dominated and ruled. Thus, a male mindset and attitudes predominate. Even the idea of the cross was not the original Christian sign. It was a fish. Later, once Christians began joining the Roman military, crosses appeared, likely as a sublime influence from Mithras Cult that was popular in military (Male only) ranks. And they loved blood letting on bulls....

I literally danced when one female asked Ken Wilbur, "What would Buddhism be like if the Buddha was female?" He first says it would probably not be consumed with quietly staring at walls, extreme body molification and developing equanimity. Instead, he drew from the female Christian mystics saying they would likely be kissing the puss-filled degenerating bodies of lepers, searching for the ultimate in selfless love. Well, that is definitely being in the body.

Graham, you've made a bunch of points recently which I agree with--particularly in the post about judgement--so I thought I'd celebrate by arguing with you.

Absolutely. The IS/IP skills have nothing directly to do with the spiritual aspects of Aikido. (Except, perhaps, that "HULK SMASH!" is not good budo.)

Yes indeedy.

Speaking on behalf of the entire IS/IP community, I declare no one would say that spiritual equals ineffective. Mostly because we'd be too busy arguing your terms, but never mind.

Oh crud, you were doing so well. This is where I think your argument runs off the rails. If you want to declare your aikido has leads to better spiritual growth than pursuing IS skills, that would be one thing. If you want to say it's more "effective"--I'm assuming martially effective, because that's the only interpretation which makes sense--then you're making a very serious claim which others are fully justified in challenging. And which you can only support by showing it in person.

On the other hand, I don't disagree with you on the subject of the spiritual dimension of O-Sensei's Aikido. I think it's clear that was important to him and an important part of his message--and an important part of what attracts people to Aikido. When he called in an "Art of Peace"--in post-war Japan--I think it was a clear and heartfelt ambition.

What I don't agree with is the idea that being focused on peace means that we all make nice. The Art of Peace is the art of the sword--as when Jesus said, "I come not to bring peace, but a sword." It's the sword that cuts through the lies and delusions, through the layers of appeasement, through the hypocrisy and politics and make-nice. It cuts through to the center, to the knot that keeps everyone bound--and it doesn't stop to untie it, but simply cuts it apart. That clarity of vision and singleness of action is, IMHO, the true budo. And it's what, at best, I think we should be trying to practice on the mat.

It is not. What does that even mean, anyway? The current situation in Syria is good? Global warming is good? Circular arguments on AikiWeb are good? It's feel-good noise.

Brilliant. I commend you. Ha, ha.

Shame about the oh crud bit though.

I do say it is effective martially and always have. Therefor it is effective 'against' I/P. and physical. It's seen by you as an argument , fair enough. It's not an argument from my perspective.

It's not 'serious' either, it's natural. I'm never or hardly ever serious. It doesn't equal challenge either unless you think martial arts is some kind of cowboy thing. I don't accept challenges any more. Been there, done that, waste of time. It's an ego thing.

That doesn't mean I can't teach most anyone. Two different things.

I'm glad you don't agree with the art of peace means we all make 'nice'. Nor do I. Harmony is different to nice. That's pretty much how I teach the sword too. True budo? Couldn't agree more. What we should at best be practicing on the mat? Indeed.

So as they say in the advert whassssssup? I agree. It's only your false view of spiritual which leads you to assume I do different.

It's all good means I understand where you are coming from and where others are coming from and where I am coming from and with that understanding and acceptance it's all good. Debating without slandering each other or our mothers, it's all good. Look for the good and you'll begin to like it.

Oh, Chris, come on. We're talking about what the man himself said about his own art. There's no comparison with random documents written by unknowns over a century after Jesus' death.

The gospel of Thomas is early source. The Hebrew disciples saw Jesus as the Liberator from Rome and Caesar..... The bringer of Shalom in the here and now upon earth.
The Greek mind saw Jesus as Christ (some neo-platonic ideal that Homer, Plato and Aristotle had prepared the way for the logos.) the Gnostics saw Christos and logos as the archetype for everyone realizing the Christ within.

So we have 3 perspectives of the event of Morehei Urshiba: first are the rough house boys who say Aikido is a martial art, others say the founder used the art to express his spiritual teachings, and others say, hey, I like the yoga of rolling and falling. It puts me into my body.

My view on Ueshiba and how he taught is from the view that he was spiritual and it showed in his teaching. At the hombu dojo in the early days and still up to now every teacher was allowed to teach his own particular style of what Ueshiba taught them. They even then went out and formed their own set ups of their particular brand. Ueshiba seemed to actively encourage this. Very spiritual and very organic.

Not true, even in the past, even less true now. Koichi Tohei is the most obvious (and public) example of this, but I personally know people that were not permitted to teach certain things while they were at hombu. The younger generation of instructors is increasingly homogenous.

Not true, even in the past, even less true now. Koichi Tohei is the most obvious (and public) example of this, but I personally know people that were not permitted to teach certain things while they were at hombu. The younger generation of instructors is increasingly homogenous.

Best,

Chris

What do you mean not true? All the various well known styles and associations were formed by his direct students. Tohei is hardly an example against what I said. Ueshiba was not against him teaching how he taught.

Of course there would be some things that wouldn't be allowed. As I said, if you don't like it leave. There is however quite a bit of leeway. That should be respected and honoured I would say by those in the organization. Strikes me some don't know how lucky they are.

The overall tone I hear is 'oh it's not like it used to be, oh it's getting worse. ohhhhhh.' I never knew budo people could make such good whingers. Seems a bit of a contradiction to me.

What do you mean not true? All the various well known styles and associations were formed by his direct students. Tohei is hardly an example against what I said. Ueshiba was not against him teaching how he taught.

Of course there would be some things that wouldn't be allowed. As I said, if you don't like it leave. There is however quite a bit of leeway. That should be respected and honoured I would say by those in the organization. Strikes me some don't know how lucky they are.

The overall tone I hear is 'oh it's not like it used to be, oh it's getting worse. ohhhhhh.' I never knew budo people could make such good whingers. Seems a bit of a contradiction to me.

Peace.G.

I was talking about the "teaching at hombu" part:

Quote:

At the hombu dojo in the early days and still up to now every teacher was allowed to teach his own particular style of what Ueshiba taught them.

I've spent a lot of time there over the years, and I've trained with most of the main characters, and that's really not the case - even when Morihei was alive.

Notice that I didn't say that things had gotten better or worse - I just said "increasingly homogenous".

This thread does it for me, I'm convinced it is a waste of time and energy to talk and talk with people who either don't, won't or can't step out of their comfort zones.That's my last post here. bye bye

"The external martial arts are based on the energy of movement, whereas the internal martial arts are based on the movement of energy" Warriors of Stillness.
Does this movement of energy, from your experience, extend into shamanic power as well.
Perhaps what I have heard Chinese call "foo"; or Bon practices of binding and releasing energies
as did Abaris (contemporary of Pythagoras)?

A Story Waiting to Pierce You: Mongolia, Tibet and the Destiny of the Western World (Paperback)
By: Peter Kingsley

This thread does it for me, I'm convinced it is a waste of time and energy to talk and talk with people who either don't, won't or can't step out of their comfort zones.That's my last post here. bye bye

Well, what did you expect with a topic called Spiritual and I/P

Neither is a prerequisite of the other and neither will lead to the other. I really cannot think of any other two things that have more diverse viewpoints than these two - mixing them in one thread just could not lead to any logical or conclusive ending

Neither is a prerequisite of the other and neither will lead to the other. I really cannot think of any other two things that have more diverse viewpoints than these two - mixing them in one thread just could not lead to any logical or conclusive ending

Greg

Ahem.......Don't you mean separating them in one thread? They are not opposites you know so I'm sure you can think of more diverse things.

Come to think of it, one day I'll do a write-up on the two. (I don't mean on here) This write up will be quite brief and divided into three sections.

1) Things in the two which are the same.
2) Things in the two which are similar.
3)Things in the two which are different.

Instead of telling me why I'm wrong or how my view is invalid, I think folks would do better to simply offer their sense of things and move on. We cannot escape the mind's task of judging the world around us; it does that whether we're aware of it or not, but we can show each other that we respect the fact that we cannot see into each other's world, even if in fact we're 100% correct about our assumptions.

Matt, the problem here is that so many people read this site and gather ideas on which they build "understandings" about aikido and budo in general.

Is it really correct to allow utterly inexperienced "teachers" to put out goofy claims without challenge?

I thought Ellis Amdur's article on Watanabe Sensei, of aikikai, was a good example of pointing out baloney. And if it is okay (even vital) to address the serious error of someone on that level, why should we pretend that all "points of view" stated here are equal?

Graham loves to talk about "real" aikido and "spiritual" aikido day and night, but the one time he had the opportunity to get to the real root of the art, being in the same room with Gozo Shioda, neither he nor his teacher actually stepped onto the mat. From what Graham has written, they never even touched Shioda Sensei to shake his hand. So Graham never experienced the mysterious power described by Robert Mustard and Ellis Amdur in the "It Had to be Felt" thread. Instead, he is informed by contact with "plenty" of people doing "internal stuff." And even though he did meet Mark Freeman, who advised us that Graham is "no Dan Harden," Graham continues to pat himself on the back and play his crumhorn of superior knowledge and understanding, telling us he understands Ueshiba's way far better than any of us who trained with Ueshiba's direct students and uchi deshi.

This forum already serves as an international repository of knowledge of aikido and will, in the future, provide "historical" reference on the art.

It is important for current and future readers to see that people with much experience in aikido and other Japanese martial arts always call baloney on people who speak so confidently about aikido without ever having dipped more than a toe or two in the water.

You say, "we can show each other that we respect the fact that we cannot see into each other's world, even if in fact we're 100% correct about our assumptions," but we're not working with assumptions: Graham has opened his "world" wide and pushed it on us as "real" and "spiritual" and even as "aikido." We didn't go and seek him out to attack. He put on his rasta hat, filmed himself doing what he does and teaching what he teaches and invited comment. He might as well have put his foot in a fire-ant bed and asked what they thought of his hakama. He shouldn't then get upset by the intense response he gets from the ants.

I think of a guy very thoughtfully chewing up one of those plastic displays from the front window of a Japanese restaurant and pretending to appreciate the delicate pleasures of eating sushi.

Best to you.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

The problem is that there is no problem. Part of Aikido training is not blaming others for our actions. Your reasoning, David, is like blaming a woman wearing a skirt for being raped. Our responses and actions reflect on those who make them not on those who supposedly provoke them.

Inner power is defined differently for different people. I think it is a combination and blending of the 2 extremes of the 2 camps that appear on this thread. The spirituality comes from the humility of taking responsibility and letting others be on their own path.

Early on I read that Jun asked us not to get into a discussion about who was better than others.

On another note: when the 220 man pushes against you is your stance natural or in hamni?

From the Dalia Lama this morning: The many factors which divide us are actually much more superficial than those we share.

Alec Corper wrote:
This thread does it for me, I'm convinced it is a waste of time and energy to talk and talk with people who either don't, won't or can't step out of their comfort zones.That's my last post here. bye bye

Well, what did you expect with a topic called Spiritual and I/P

Neither is a prerequisite of the other and neither will lead to the other. I really cannot think of any other two things that have more diverse viewpoints than these two - mixing them in one thread just could not lead to any logical or conclusive ending

Greg

That's unfortunate. I for one am going to try and change his mind. Three or four people don't make a forum. If I had caved, while fighting the tide of ignorance over this extremely important, even vital work, none of the teachers would have ever met me.
Alec has very worthwhile opinions and viewpoints from very broad experience. Interestingly, those embracing this work are typically people with several decades of experience in and out of Japan and China. In one sense most of the detractors don't even come close to their level of comparative ability and judgement.

Don't give up so quickly Alec. Contrary to all the unsupported hubris and huff and puff that continues to fall apart in person...not all opinions it turns out...really are equal.
Try to adopt an informative mindset as opposed to a debate mindset. I don't come on these forums anymore thinking I am debating with my equals (in skill level only of course, not as people). A wise Master Class teacher when asked why he doesn't talk on forums, looked up bemused and said. "Why argue....with students."

Of these detractors-who can stand on a mat and be tested this way?
Not a single one of them.
And Alec? They know it.
So don't take it so seriously. Remember you are talking to thousands of readers, far past a handful who will oppose you no matter what you say. Look at me. I am being asked to come to Japan and teach friends of doshu and go to China...and I am arguing with some sandan on a forum?

These seminars with me and others are all booked for a simple reason. Their stuff simply doesn't work. Ours does. How many are thrilled to see that they had wasted decades in the wrong direction? Do you think their happy about that?

The art is finally moving forward and gaining power. So, does it really matter what they say? In time...if they are not doing this type of work, they will be sidelined as not doing Aikido.. as they simply will not be able to hide it. They won't be able to stand on a mat and function with those who do.
Look ahead Alec.

Greg
On the one hand I agree, except that a lot of this work was tied to the spiritual aspects....in VERY physical ways.
Cheers
Dan

Your reasoning, David, is like blaming a woman wearing a skirt for being raped.

This is not a logical analogy but rather an appeal to emotion.

If someone had jumped Graham in the street and beaten him with a bat and David was condoning it using the argument that Graham considered his art to be effective so was "asking for it" then the analogy would hold; he's not, he's merely stating his viewpoint on the nature of Graham's presented views.

People are welcome to assert whatever they like, including that anothers assertions are a load of rubbish.

One should be prepared to justify/support/defend their opinions or should consider keeping them to themselves if responses upset them.

The issue centered upon "who's in charge of this thing", "how do we maintain the branding?"
And "How do we keep quality control?"

The irony is that in his attempt to guide the organization, he comes into direct conflict with Origen and essentially sews the seeds that divides the church between Rome and the East. And the Gnostics? They continued their practices by going into hiding much like the first Christians did. Their ideas did not change, for, a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.

Their stance, as stated by another mystic medeival female Christian, (Theresa of Avilla) would be "Oh Lord, protect me from your followers".